Oh look, it turns out that every single media outlet was wrong, and my simple logic about how this would work is correct. I told everyone to chill the hell out and not jump to conclusions, and OH LOOK.

Via Polygon:

The Xbox One will automatically authenticate a game using an encryption code built into a game's disc, when it is installed on the machine. That authentication on the console's hard drive tied to the game is then verified regularly through an internet connection.

When a person sells the game or it is installed and played on another system, the game is deauthenticated on the original machine until the disc is brought back and used to re-authenticate the installation.

Our sources also said that there are no plans to charge gamers a fee to sell or reactive a used game.

It's literally the exact system I said there would be yesterday, while the Internet was busy writing editorials about the end of used games and gnashing their teeth. So I'm sure this revelation means we'll be seeing apology articles popping up soon on every single game news site (especially Kotaku) for whipping everyone into a panicked frenzy? Yeah right...

Full Polygon article here

**Edited to add: Yeah, this post is a bit dickish, and for that I apologize.**

That sounds perfectly reasonable.

Well you are the Doctor. You cheated and used time traveling.

There is a fee - its paid by the store you sell it to (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-05-24-this-is-how-xbox-one-game-trade-ins-will-work-apparently). By doing that MS controls the price of used games.

That doesnt sound bad. The disk being used on another console merely deactivating your installation till you reactivate it? yeah i'm down for that.

I never buy used games so i didnt care about this whole thing. People flipping out was entertaining though. "MAH CONSUMAR RIGHTS!!!!!"

Why don't they just tell us instead of doing this strange dance? Is there a secret that needs to be protected? If the truth is not going to make the audience happy avoiding that isn't going to make it go away. The evasion of answering what concerns the audience is causing problems where saying "It is okay trust us" isn't inspiring trust.

Maybe they wanted more to show off at E3 and the bad news just got to out of hand.

Hopefully someone can verify this. If true, then you are paying a fee. Stores like Gamestop are going to incorporate whatever is charged to them into the price of the used game.

Is the suggestion that the internet might have jumped the gun?

No way.

They did say it, just in a piss poor and unclear manner. My understanding of how it would work was gathered from the comments made by Phil Harrsion and Major Nelson, not time travel (though that did make me laugh).

Very poor initial messaging on their part.

You mean Microsoft was wrong because it was their own people giving the media the "facts". But that's cool Microsoft blame the media because your left hand doesn't know what the right is doing.

And even with this "statement" of passing the blame they still fail to tell you exactly what they are doing with used games. They learned nothing. Bravo Microsoft you're still clueless right now.

@andorski:

Hopefully someone can verify this. If true, then you are paying a fee. Stores like Gamestop are going to incorporate whatever is charged to them into the price of the used game.

Since they only charge 5 bucks less for a used copy already, it's not like this would increase the prices if true. There's no way consumers are going to choose used if GS prices them within $3 of a new copy, so they'll have no choice but to give a slice of their profit to the publishers. That's a huge win for the industry in my eyes, since more money going to the creators of the product is always good.

Also, this part from the Polygon article - if true - is a shit move on MS's part.

While an internet connection will be required for the console, the company is also experimenting with special exemption codes that could be given to select people in very particular, internet-free situations, like active-duty soldiers serving in war zones, sources tell Polygon.

MS is thinking about making an Offline Pass.

As always, this sounds realistic.

There is no official stance at this point, and any details seem to change every other day. I can't take these stories seriously at this point until I hear a final confirmation of their used game plans from Microsoft themselves.

Something seems to be missing out this equation. Somebody has to pay, somewhere otherwise this doesn't make sense any sense for the Publishers and Microsoft.

Why would else would Microsoft care to authenticate the game? I suspect There is some truth Eurogamer rumors about charging retailers a fee and setting a price floor must have some validity to them....

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-05-24-this-is-how-xbox-one-game-trade-ins-will-work-apparently

In which case you still are paying the fee, you just don't see it. That would be kinda of what like Credit Card companies do now.

The big question is how much is the fee to retailers and what is the price floor? Another question is the Price Floor time sensitive? E.g. if a game is four years old, a lot of game stores mark them down a lot to clear them out. Will Microsoft make the Floor stay above 40 bucks for even old titles?

I guess who this really kills is Ebay, peer trading services and yard sales.

@devilzrule27:

No, they worded it poorly and the media ran click bait headlines with their guess of a DOOMSDAY SCENARIO.

I'm just some chucklehead with an Internet connection and I figured it out immediately after reading the words that Phil Harrsion said. Professional reporters who get paid to comprehend what is said failing to do the same is just sad.

How does this effect Gamefly and redbox?

So there would be no charge at all to give a game to a friend?

I have only bought one game on a disc all year and it was new so I didn't really have a problem with the rumors. But this is still good to hear for people that buy used often.

@thetenthdoctor:

No need to sound like a dick duder.

EDIT:

This also means that systems have to be online in order for games to be played. It also means that once the Live servers go down these games, and the console, will be expensive paper weights.

I think I'll wait for Microsoft to actually make a clear statement on the matter for everyone to hear, thanks.

I'm confused. In this system, if you sell a game to gamestop, or wherever, you still have access to the game until someone else buys it and puts it into their system? That seems weird. Unless there's some way to tell when you actually turned it in.

I'm just curious because I know there are probably plenty of games sitting on Gamestop's shelves that have been there for A WHILE. Will Gamestop have to de-authenticate it using a proprietary system?

All of this just sounds crazy for a system that shouldn't even exist in the first place.

A code built into the disk.

@slag: Why would else would Microsoft care to authenticate the game? I suspect There is some truth Eurogamer rumors about charging retailers a fee and setting a price floor must have some validity to them....

Why do they care to authenticate it? So one kid doesn't buy a single copy of Halo and pass it around the entire school, 300 people installing it on their hard drives and playing with only one copy sold.

It's the exact same reason the 360 currently requires a disc in the tray, only the online authentication needed to be added since they've added the ability to play installed games without the disc.

@thetenthdoctor: The $5 difference between new and used games last for a couple of weeks for most games, and only really stick for the most popular franchises (e.g. Halo). The majority of used games that stores like Gamestop sell have a larger gap. For games that have been out for a while, the difference in price between new and used games are as large as 50%.

And while I understand the idea of making sure that developers/publishers get a cut from the proliferation of their work, the used game market is in response to Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft's inability to adapt to a market that demands variable price structures for games. Instead, Microsoft is now opting to just force their customers to pay their premium game prices.

[edit] Just checked the Gamestop website. Holy shit are they terrible with their used game prices. Yea... Gamestop will basically pay the fee with the way they price stuff.

@andorski said:

What I don't understand about this scenario is why MS gets any money from the game's sale. Hasn't the publisher paid them a fee to develop for their system in the first place? Because they want a cut, people will be paying more for used games? That sounds kinda crappy.

Still rather have the PS4.

@the_laughing_man said:

That's what their Azure authenticating system is about for Gamestop and Best Buy and retailers like them. I'm guessing unless your friend owns a retail store and has the Azure authenticating service you probably won't be able to lend/give him your game.

I have no idea what Microsoft will do for gamefly and redbox. They might be screwed. I don't think we really know yet.

@daneian: It's not just a set fee in order to publish a game on a console. Console makers get a percentage of sales.

Apologies. I've just been amazed at how ludicrous the coverage has been the last 3 days, with even respectable mainstream news outlets running breathless stories about Microsoft destroying the used game industry and being money grubbing pricks. I'm no huge MS fan, but it's maddening to watch when the comments right from Harrison and Nelson spelled it all out if people just took the time to rub two brain cells together.

I meant at the retailer level.

i.e. Why does Gamestop need this Azure system since the authenticating is being done at the user level?

I get the piracy angle, due to the install issue as you pointed out.

@thetenthdoctor: This doesn't fix the problems of loaning and borrowing and general ownership once authentication servers are taken down. Steam gave us a guarantee, if Microsoft wants my sword they'll have to do the same... and I'm not sure they have the trust of me as a gamer at the moment when they'll run off the moment the mainstream media crowd blinks twice in their direction. Not to mention the source needs to be better. Since they "It's not always online but it requires an internet connection." I'm getting a very strong "Well what would you WANT me to say? I'll say it!" feeling from microsoft in the last few days.

and yeah, you're super aggressive on this thing, you may want to take a little time and check your posts for tone.

is this official if not then you are not as awesome as you think yet!!

So it boils down to. You buy a game. Install it and play it. When you return it they scan the code and the game is removed from your system.

Is this glorified renting?

I think Azure is for retailers to immediately de-authorize the game from the previous owner's account (which answers the earlier question of "what happens if the trade in sits around forever on the shelf?").

Swaps between friends will probably still be just fine, I'm guessing. If I borrow a game from my friend and run it on my system, he'll be unable to play it at home off his HDD until I give him back the disc to be re-checked on his Xbox.

@thetenthdoctor:

Well, Microsoft haven't really been helping themselves being vague and contradicting themselves as often as they can.

Good point. There must be some sort of proprietary de-authentication system Gamestop will use when they buy a used game. Otherwise, yeah, if that used game isn't bought by someone else for months, what stops the original owner from continuing to play the install?

verified regularly through an internet connection.

This is the part that I like the least. What if I don't have internet for a few days and still want to play Halo 5's campaign? What if someone who doesn't have internet at all, or for some reason can't connect their Xbox to the internet, wants to play Halo 5's campaign? What about when the Xbox One servers inevitably go down and I still have a working Xbox One and want to play Halo 5's campaign?

This is all hypothetical, of course. I'm not sure I'll get one.

MS is looking into giving people without internet connection an Offline Pass to circumvent the online check, which I find laughable.

Apologies again, but I think it's odd that no one was concerned with aggressive tones when the entire site was screaming RARRGARBL MS SUCKS for no reason.

Everyone wanted to assume the worst and ignore people suggesting this might not be nefarious at all, so I can't help but be a little bit cocky in my vindication. I'm not even really annoyed by the general public leaping to conclusions- it's the media I'm shocked by. Shame on MS for not messaging this better, but double shame on journalists covering the industry for not bothering to look a bit deeper before running their editorials about nonexistent fees and the death of used games.

@believer258: Yeah, that's what makes the 24 hour window too strict. Should really be 72 at least. What if you're switching providers or something and your internet's down for a few days?

Yep. Not a fan of this at all. And yeah the OP comes off kind of dickish by blaming the media for Microsoft not having a unified answer to this obviously-going-to-be-asked question. And I REALLY don't like the idea of this console I'm paying between four and five hundred dollars for possibly (this is Microsoft we're talking about) multiple times over being unable to play games once they inevitably pull the plug on it. And if they have servers set up for individual games, will my Elder Scrolls game not play 3 years after I buy it? I still have a lot of questions that I've seen no answers to.

That's what buying and selling used games has always been. You buy a game, play it, and then some people resell it to someone else.

"One source says" is hardly confirmation of anything. Don't try to blame the media for this. The messaging from Microsoft has been fucking horrendous.

If there was no fee, then they should have said "there is no fee", which, by the way, is the complete opposite of what Phil Spencer said when he explicitly said there would be.

That would be nice, I'm not so sure that will happen like that though. I don't really think Publishers want people lending their games, that's probably even worse in their eyes than used games sales.

My suspicion is Azure is there to force you to sell your games only through Microsoft's selected partners (Gamestop, Best Buy etc) as a give back to them for Microsoft and the Publishers now taking a cut of used games sales.

That would solve three problems at once for Microsoft. They won't piss off Gamestop and Best Buy who they still need to move hardware, They help the publishers get more of a cut off residual sales off their physical games, and they slow down free sharing and peer to peer trading of games which also appeases publishers.

We really don't know at this point, we'll have to wait and see what they tell us.

Oh well that doesn't at all seem potentially exploitable and super dumb.

@thetenthdoctor: I do hope this turns out to be accurate. Though, I would agree with others that you're sounding horribly dickish about it. I can understand some frustration with what you see as media outlets not agreeing with your assessment of conflicting statements, but none of them need to apologize for Microsoft being very unclear about this. Just because you possibly guessed at the proper interpretation of their vague statements doesn't mean everyone else deserves to be talked down to like they're mentally deficient chimps.

Again, I hope this really is the case, but whether it is or not, none of us need to be a dick about it.

That's a good point. I didn't think about how long some of the duds sit on the shelves.

I'm assuming that de-authentication is probably part of what Azure will do for retailers.

What a mess.

Then why on Earth would they want to implement it in the first place? This is so fucking convoluted.

It shouldn't be there at all.

There's plenty of reason to direct ire toward Microsoft. Few remarkable exclusives? Pushing games to the side in favor of showing off a glorified set top box? Trying their absolute hardest to sell the Kinect in the hope that it will sell the 360 like the Wii once did, when by most accounts the damn thing doesn't always work right and has few interesting games? Making the dashboard extremely slow and clunky to use with a controller - you know, the main input device? And filling it chock full of ads?

And on top of all that, they haven't really told us exactly how used games and always-online internet will work, while they have made it known that games aren't necessarily their priority this coming generation. And what we do know about used games and requiring an internet connection sounds quite disagreeable. To an extent, this is the internet being the internet, but this time it isn't as unreasonable as it usually is.